Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 418 / Act 317 of 1969
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.435 (2026)

Employer from whom total compensation recoverable; effect of dispute or controversy.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

WORKER'S DISABILITY COMPENSATION ACT OF 1969


Act 317 of 1969


418.435 Employer from whom total compensation recoverable; effect of dispute or controversy.

Sec. 435.

    The total compensation due shall be recoverable from the employer who last employed the employee in the employment to the nature of which the disease was due and in which it was contracted. If any dispute or controversy arises as to the payment of compensation or as to liability for the compensation, the employee shall make claim upon the last employer only and apply for a hearing against the last employer only.

History: 1969, Act 317, Eff. Dec. 31, 1969 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 337, Imd. Eff. Jan. 4, 1973 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 357, Eff. Jan. 1, 1981

PopularName Notes:

Act 317
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases, 1970–2010 · leading case: Derwinski v. Eureka Tire Co., 286 N.W.2d 672 (Mich. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Derwinski v. Eureka Tire Co., 286 N.W.2d 672 (Mich. 1979). · cites it 14× “Plaintiff's petition for compensation was filed against defendant Eureka, the last employer, who *495 subsequently filed a motion seeking apportionment of any benefits between it and prior employers under MCL 418.435; MSA 17.237(435), which applies only to occupational diseases.”
Bennett v. Mackinac Bridge Auth., 808 N.W.2d 471 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “Likewise, another section of the WDCA formerly provided that when an employee disabled by an occupational disease filed a claim for benefits against his or her “last employer,” the last employer could compel the joinder of the disabled employee’s prior employers as defendants…”
Lambard v. Saga Food Serv., Inc, 338 N.W.2d 207 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “MCL 418.435; MSA 17.237(435). Saga argues that, at the time of his death, decedent was employed by the Greek Corner, a restaurant started by his son, two nephews and himself, and that, therefore, the Greek Corner is liable for the payment of benefits to plaintiff.”
Kingery v. Ford Motor Co., 323 N.W.2d 318 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “The WCAB applied MCL 418.435; MSA 17.237(435) to apportion liability between the employers "in accordance with time worked for each employer and not any subjective assessment of the relative exposure impact at each location”.”
Hughes v. Lakey Foundry Corp., 284 N.W.2d 135 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 4× “The WCAB further found that the job at Eagle-Ottawa aggravated, accelerated or contributed to his back condition only, resulting in plaintiff’s, total disability in the field of common labor.”
Hudson v. Jackson Plating Co., 307 N.W.2d 96 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 4× “Finally, MCL 418.435; MSA 17.237(435) requires the employee’s last employer to pay the total compensation for the disease if the employment was the type to which the disease was due and in which it was contracted.”
Derwinski v. Eureka Tire Co., 263 N.W.2d 30 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 3× “” MCLA 418.435; MSA 17.237(435). (Emphasis added.”
Braxton v. Chevrolet Grey Iron Foundry Div. of Gen. Motors Corp., 242 N.W.2d 420 (Mich. 1976). · cites it 2× “The act specifically defines a much different basis for the determination of employer liability. "The first sentence of part 7, § 9, of the workmen's compensation act provides: "`The total compensation due shall be recoverable from the employer who last employed the employee in…”
Carter v. Lakey Foundry Corp., 324 N.W.2d 622 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “When this case was decided by the hearing referee, apportionment for occupationally related diseases was governed by MCL 418.435; MSA 17.237(435), which provided, in pertinent part: "If the employee was employed by prior employers in an employment to the nature of which the…”
Stanley v. Hinchliffe & Kenner, 238 N.W.2d 13 (Mich. 1976). “…to mention questions of interstate comity or res adjudicata.” 1 Schneider, Workmen’s Compensation, § 160, p 470. 16 MCLA 418.435; MSA 17.237(435).”
Todd v. Textron, Inc., 364 N.W.2d 718 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 9× “MCL 418.435; MSA 17.237(435). The only dispute is a legal question: When does the Worker’s Disability Compensation Act require the SISF to begin to pay its proportionate share? Since Todd and Collins became disabled because of an occupational disease, Textron’s responsibility to…”
Johnson v. Valley Grey Iron Foundry, 228 N.W.2d 469 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 3× “” On the day following the redemption hearing, Valley moved to join Saginaw and its insurer as parties defendant pursuant to MCLA 418.435; MSA 17.237(435) "so that proper apportionment pursuant to the Workmen’s Compensation Act can be made”.”
Show all 33 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.